The DeSantis gambit

Ziggurat said:
You ask that as if the answer is going to be meaningful in context. It isn't.
Click to expand...

It very much is.

Or is your claim that an agency that ALWAYS was run by a member of only one of the two Parties somehow managed to maintain a culture of pure political neutrality?
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It very much is.

Or is your claim that an agency that ALWAYS was run by a member of only one of the two Parties somehow managed to maintain a culture of pure political neutrality?
Click to expand...

That wasn't my claim either. Pay closer attention. Read Gulliver's claim again, carefully. Read my response to his claim again, carefully. I never claimed neutrality. Strictly speaking, I didn't make any claim at all, except that Gulliver's premise may be wrong, something you haven't actually contested.

And what exactly do you think party affiliation even means, for non-political offices? Nothing, really. It determines which primary the person in question wants to vote in, but nothing beyond that. There's no test of loyalty, no required beliefs, no mandated policy positions one needs to have to be a Democrat or a Republican. It's just a check on a voter registration card, nothing more.

And lastly, the FBI is, as most bureaucracies are, loyal to itself above any political party.
 
Ziggurat said:
That wasn't my claim either. Pay closer attention. Read Gulliver's claim again, carefully. Read my response to his claim again, carefully. I never claimed neutrality. Strictly speaking, I didn't make any claim at all, except that Gulliver's premise may be wrong, something you haven't actually contested.

And what exactly do you think party affiliation even means, for non-political offices? Nothing, really. It determines which primary the person in question wants to vote in, but nothing beyond that. There's no test of loyalty, no required beliefs, no mandated policy positions one needs to have to be a Democrat or a Republican. It's just a check on a voter registration card, nothing more.

And lastly, the FBI is, as most bureaucracies are, loyal to itself above any political party.
Click to expand...

Trump fired a FBI director for not being loyal, so your post is naïve at best.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Trump fired a FBI director for not being loyal
Click to expand...

Which kinda suggests he wasn't, you know, particularly loyal to the Republican party. How exactly does that contradict what I said? Oh, right, it doesn't.

And I know this might come as a shock to you, but firing someone for not being sufficiently loyal doesn't always make everyone else more loyal. The whole joke about "beatings will continue until morale improves" is funny precisely because it doesn't work.
 
Ziggurat said:
Which kinda suggests he wasn't, you know, particularly loyal to the Republican party. How exactly does that contradict what I said? Oh, right, it doesn't.

And I know this might come as a shock to you, but firing someone for not being sufficiently loyal doesn't always make everyone else more loyal. The whole joke about "beatings will continue until morale improves" is funny precisely because it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

loyal to TRUMP.

now you claim is that that is the same as being loyal to the Republican Party?
 
you are blind on your right eye, Zig.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/03/fbi-leaks-hillary-clinton-james-comey-donald-trump
"The FBI is Trumpland"
Click to expand...


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/10/fbi-clinton-leaks-2016-giuliani/


Comey during the 2016 election had to open the probe again, because of pro-Trump bias in the agency:
FBI general counsel James Baker told the IG’s office that the FBI had been confident that “if we don’t put out a letter, somebody is going to leak it. That definitely was discussed.”
Click to expand...

Trump himself claimed on multiple occasions to have heard from FBI agents in secret, and Giuliani said he had inside contacts with the FBI.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz told the Senate Judiciary Committee in December 2019 that his office was “very concerned about” possible leaks from the FBI field office.


There is nothing like this in FBI agents favouring Democrats - and when Trump&co made that claim, they lost in Court every single time.

It is factually wrong to claim that the FBI does not have a pro-Republican bias.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
you are blind on your right eye, Zig.
Click to expand...

Bwahahahahaha!

No. We've got anonymous sources upset about Comey's tepid investigation of Hillary trying to push back against it by portraying the FBI as biased in favor of Trump, but that's farcical on its face, given we know that the FBI instigated a years-long investigation of Trump on fake grounds and committed numerous errors if not outright crimes in the process.

It is factually wrong to claim that the FBI does not have a pro-Republican bias.
Click to expand...

I think you're confused as to what constitutes a fact rather than an opinion.
 
Ziggurat said:
That wasn't my claim either. Pay closer attention. Read Gulliver's claim again, carefully. Read my response to his claim again, carefully. I never claimed neutrality. Strictly speaking, I didn't make any claim at all, except that Gulliver's premise may be wrong, something you haven't actually contested.

And what exactly do you think party affiliation even means, for non-political offices? Nothing, really. It determines which primary the person in question wants to vote in, but nothing beyond that. There's no test of loyalty, no required beliefs, no mandated policy positions one needs to have to be a Democrat or a Republican. It's just a check on a voter registration card, nothing more.

And lastly, the FBI is, as most bureaucracies are, loyal to itself above any political party.
Click to expand...

Wasn't a claim, it was a statement of fact. It takes real intense ignoring of reality to think otherwise.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
Wasn't a claim, it was a statement of fact. It takes real intense ignoring of reality to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

And yet, by your own admission, reality didn't seem to comport with this alleged fact, causing you confusion.

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Winston Churchill
 
Best Disney themed comment about De Santis:
"Looks as if Disney won't have to build a robot version of De Santis to put into the Hall of Presidents at Disney World".
 
Farmer;'s Insurance, one of the really,really, big insuranc companies, pulling out of Florida because Florida law keeps them from higher rates for insuring buildings in high risk flood areas..which a lot of coastal Florida has become becuase of Global Warming. Apparently they have been waring De Santis about this for some time, hoping he would get some change made, but he refused. So now a good many Floridians will lose their insurance. Noice/
 
dudalb said:
Farmer;'s Insurance, one of the really,really, big insuranc companies, pulling out of Florida because Florida law keeps them from higher rates for insuring buildings in high risk flood areas..which a lot of coastal Florida has become becuase of Global Warming. Apparently they have been waring De Santis about this for some time, hoping he would get some change made, but he refused. So now a good many Floridians will lose their insurance. Noice/
Click to expand...


I'm surprised he hasn't put out an ad blaming flooding on gays, lesbians, and trans.

ETA: ... and immigrants, of course.
 
Ziggurat said:
[snip]

And what exactly do you think party affiliation even means, for non-political offices? Nothing, really. It determines which primary the person in question wants to vote in, but nothing beyond that. There's no test of loyalty, no required beliefs, no mandated policy positions one needs to have to be a Democrat or a Republican. It's just a check on a voter registration card, nothing more.

And lastly, the FBI is, as most bureaucracies are, loyal to itself above any political party.
Click to expand...


I guess you believe that the party affiliations of our three Trump justices have had no bearing on the decisions they have been making.

Rank nonsense. I know you're not that foolish, so you must be dissembling.
 
quadraginta said:
I guess you believe that the party affiliations of our three Trump justices have had no bearing on the decisions they have been making.
Click to expand...

The fact that they are conservative is what matters, not their party affiliation itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom